| Title |
Authoritative Parenting, Parenting Stress, and Self-Care in Pre-Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10880-011-9284-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maureen Monaghan, Ivor B. Horn, Vanessa Alvarez, Fran R. Cogen, Randi Streisand |
| Abstract |
Parent involvement in type 1 diabetes (T1DM) care leads to improved adherence; however, the manner in which parents approach illness management interactions with children must also be considered. It was hypothesized that greater use of an authoritative parenting style and less parenting stress would be associated with greater behavioral adherence and better metabolic control. Ninety-five primary caregivers of preadolescents (ages 8-11) with T1DM completed questionnaires assessing parenting style, pediatric parenting stress, and child behavioral adherence. Caregivers primarily self-identified as using an authoritative parenting style. Greater authoritative parenting was associated with greater behavioral adherence and less difficulty with pediatric parenting stress; no differences in metabolic control were observed. Greater engagement in authoritative parenting behaviors may contribute to increased age-appropriate child behavioral adherence and less pediatric parenting stress. Interventions highlighting diabetes-specific authoritative parenting techniques may enhance health outcomes and improve overall family functioning. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 129 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 13% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 9% |
| Other | 21 | 16% |
| Unknown | 27 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 51 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 8% |
| Unknown | 30 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 January 2013.
All research outputs
#17,655,675
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
#357
of 440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,809
of 155,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 440 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 155,801 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.